CT shooting, my letter to AZ Senators

Living in Arizona, I can't just stand by on this any more. I've always been worried about lack of real protection for our children. It's unacceptable and I have sent the following to Senators here. You are free to copy and use for Senators in your state.

It's time to get real about our schools, the most important locations for us to defend.

"Dear Senator,

I write you as news of the CT shooting has occured. I am the parent of a Kindergardener, and I am distraught over this event. I hugged my little girl tighter today than I think I ever have.

I was born in Arizona and have lived here my whole life. I feel my duty to express that safety is my first priority when I send my child to her school. They do have a lock down proceedure, but no proactive defense. I'm tired of seeing these types of events happen in gun free zones that a homicidal animal decided to ignore.

I feel it is the time to legislate that any school that would like to operate in Arizona be required to have an armed Police Officer or armed Security Guard. If I trust my school to provide education to my child, I don't think it's a stretch to expect them to provide real protection for them as well. Locked doors are no longer enough. With the events that just occured, I don't see how this would not be the wish of every parent and voter in Arizona.

I appreciate your time, and please contact me. Thank you."

**Any one with additional ideas please give them, I want to do anything to propose real measures in taking this issue on***

I read of this tragic event, and as I grieve and pray for the victims and their families, I can't help wondering how it can even be remotely rational to anyone that if handguns were illegal this monster, who clearly had no respect for law or life, would not have done this.

The desperate and crazed do not bother checking to see if what they decide to do is illegal--they just do it.

Friendly, Don't Fire!

December 14, 2012, 03:02 PM

My prayers go out to the families and friends of this horrible tragedy.

desidog

December 14, 2012, 03:31 PM

I'd add that apparently Connecticut's Assault Weapon Ban, which has been in place since 1994, did not stop this tragedy.

Onward Allusion

December 14, 2012, 03:38 PM

My prayers with the families. . .

Like someone else said in another thread that had been closed: Armed the teachers... Is it really that far fetched??? I mean Israel and Thailand allow their teachers to be armed. Israel actually has armed parent/teacher aides.

As an aside, CT has some of the Country's most stringent gun laws (next to CA & NY) - looks like it didn't help one bit.

XD 45acp

December 14, 2012, 03:46 PM

There are plenty of people like me, that are willing to take those guard positions. I am more than willing to undergo the checks & training that the position would require. I am also willing to donate 1 day a week to do that job at no cost to the county. Israel has had to deal with this for a long time. I believe we can learn alot from them.

Old Fuff

December 14, 2012, 03:54 PM

I'm not up on the story, but could it be that schools (up to and including colleges and universities) are picked to be killing grounds because they advertise, "no guns allowed," and therefore provide the shooter a safe place to do the shooting?

I don't know of any instance where a sign at the front door, or a statute in a law book, or a ban on any particular style of firearm, ever stopped a determined killer. I do know of some that were unexpectedly ended because unknown to the shooter an armed person was in or near the site.

After the shooting could it be that the sensational reporting of it in the media might encourage other deranged individuals to be copycats?

As long as we have designated Gun Free Zones that provide attractive victims and little risk these incidents will continue. :banghead:

ErikO

December 14, 2012, 04:39 PM

This one seems to be a family issue. Kindergarten teacher was the shooter's mother.

One thing that spree killers seem to have in common is mental illness. Proper funding of '80's era mental health initiatives would go much further than any additional restrictions ever could.

ColtPythonElite

December 14, 2012, 04:47 PM

x2 on this being a mental health, not gun, problem.

19-3Ben

December 14, 2012, 05:10 PM

As an aside, CT has some of the Country's most stringent gun laws (next to CA & NY) - looks like it didn't help one bit.

Really? We certainly some silly laws. We can't buy an AK pattern rifle in 7.62x39, but we can in any other caliber. We can't buy a Colt brand AR15 receiver, but any other brand is ok. Things like that are nuts.
But, we don't have capacity bans, we can buy/own hollow-point ammo, we can readily get carry permits, etc...

It's bad, but not nearly as bad as NY, NJ, CA, MA.

Either way, I pass by Sandy Hook/Newtown a few times a week. I'm very familiar with the area. This is devastating to us all.

Armed guards are a good idea, but in the end, it's probably just the first guy to get shot.

Old Fuff

December 14, 2012, 05:21 PM

Armed guards are a good idea, but in the end, it's probably just the first guy to get shot.

Armed guards may or may not be a good idea, but if you advertise that the schools have staff and guards that are armed to the teeth those sites become very unattractive for most potential shooters. As it is now with absolutely useless Gun Free Zones they face little or no risk - and know it.

Rail Driver

December 14, 2012, 05:33 PM

Gun control has failed the children of Newton, Connecticut today. If just one lawfully armed citizen had been present when this shooting began, it could have been stopped before so many innocent lives were taken. My heart weeps for the affected families, and they have my most sincere condolences.

MSgtEgress

December 14, 2012, 05:37 PM

"Gun free" zones exacerbate the problem. Where can a crazy go to inflict the most carnage possible but a place they KNOW there will be no other guns but theirs. Eliminating these gun-free zones and comprehensive CCW laws are the only solution that will limit the injuries /deaths of these rampages.

Rail Driver

December 14, 2012, 05:39 PM

"Gun free" zones exacerbate the problem. Where can a crazy go to inflict the most carnage possible but a place they KNOW there will be no other guns but theirs. Eliminating these gun-free zones and comprehensive CCW laws are the only solution that will limit the injuries /deaths of these rampages.
I don't think comprehensive CCW laws are the answer. I think constitutional carry is the answer. Any regulation of the right to keep and bear arms is an unconstitutional infringement, and should not exist.

MSgtEgress

December 14, 2012, 06:02 PM

Rail Driver, The Bill of Rights applies only to the federal government the federal Bill of Rights does not guarantee you one solitary thing in your state, nothing, zero, zilch, nada, nothing. If you read the presentation to the states to ratify that Bill of Rights, if you read what it was that Congress said when they passed them, if you read the preamble that was inserted into the Bill of Rights, it is clear, anyone alive at the time would have told you this, this would have been 100 percent unanimous, those ten amendments that were ratified were meant as prohibitions only and specifically at what the Federal government could do.

So when you cite the Second Amendment, don’t wave it at your state legislature because it doesn’t apply. It only applies to Congress. So that’s the bad news for us. We've been taught our whole life that the Second Amendment is universal and it controls every living firearm from here to Romulus to LV-426, all the way to the ice world of Hoth and then back to the Titan moon of Saturn. That is incorrect. It only applies to the general government. Each State needs to in-act their own CCW with reciprocity.

VPLthrneck

December 14, 2012, 06:28 PM

Like someone else said in another thread that had been closed: Armed the teachers... Is it really that far fetched???

Not far fetched at all, at a minimum they should have a taser on them. This day in age that would be the best tactic to take. An armed security guard or Police Officer would have just been one more casualty in this terrible event. Or that person might have been in another wing of the building and thus be unable to respond in time. Personnally I would rather have the teachers and school staff get training in gun safety and defensive uses and show competency in those areas. While this might not have saved the life of the perpetator's mother, it might have saved the life of many others.

For those that pay attention to the places these types of events happen they are almost always in areas that are "gun free zones." And also it is usually in states, counties, and cities that are less than gun friendly.

481

December 14, 2012, 07:12 PM

I'd like to see teachers armed (or have the option), too.

Those being brave enough to try and stop such a miserable excuse of a human being ought to at least have the instrument(s) necessary to do so.

tomrkba

December 14, 2012, 07:34 PM

While we're at it, let's attach a mental health standard to all rights in the First Amendment. Once that has been thoroughly tested, let's apply the mental health standard to all rights in the Constitution.

Are you really going to trust your child's safety to a person paid poorly and who receives only a bare minimum of firearms training?

We are supposed to be operating militias. Guarding schools would be a good mission for them.

Texan Scott

December 14, 2012, 08:25 PM

The Bill of Rights applies only to the federal government the federal Bill of Rights does not guarantee you one solitary thing in your state

Actually, section one of the fourteenth amendment specifies that No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States .

This has been tried, tested, and upheld to the point that it is now referred to as the Incorporation Clause. The States ratified it, and so are bound Constitutionally to uphold the Bill of Rights. Some resist accepting the 2A as an inviolable individual right, but of late it seems the courts are in the process of correcting that. Wanna wave the 2A at your state legislature? Staple the 14th, the 5th, and the 9th and 10th to it, roll it up, and smack 'em with it.

Arm the teachers? If you can't trust them with a pistol, why would you trust them with your kids? This doesn't have to be a government program (gasp.... you mean not everything has to be a government program? ) ... just remove the legal barrier to CHL holding teachers carrying on school property.

My kids' school district has multiple armed cops in every school building. Not because we've HAD horrific shootings, but so we WON'T. CT has ... locks and signs. Both apparently failed to prevent this atrocity; neither did 16 years of "assault weapons" ban do any more to stop murder than, well, laws against murder. Where you keep sheep, you'd better have dogs. Wolves don't respect fences ... only dogs' teeth.

My heart breaks for those who lost children. Words after the fact help no more than rules beforehand ... those of you that pray, please pray for them in their grief.

allaroundhunter

December 14, 2012, 08:45 PM

Schools in my district all have at least one armed officer on each campus at all times. However, one officer will not do much in terms of keeping the number of wounded down. If you really want to make a difference, push for it to no longer be a "defense free zone". Push for teachers to be allowed to carry.

Here in Texas, teachers and administrators of schools that are far enough away from police protection are allowed to carry firearms on school grounds and in buildings.....I have yet to hear of anything bad happening there.

Texan Scott

December 14, 2012, 09:03 PM

Exactly... and 300 yards and/or 3 flights of stairs may be "too far from police protection". Just let the teachers and administrators CC.

481

December 14, 2012, 09:25 PM

While we're at it, let's attach a mental health standard to all rights in the First Amendment. Once that has been thoroughly tested, let's apply the mental health standard to all rights in the Constitution.

That's quite an over-reaction.

Are you really going to trust your child's safety to a person paid poorly and who receives only a bare minimum of firearms training?

If I didn't trust them with my children to begin with, my children wouldn't be there in the first place. There are teachers who could and would stand (much as they did today) against the sort of evil we have seen today and I'd rather have them there (and armed) than not.

We are supposed to be operating militias. Guarding schools would be a good mission for them.

The assumption underlying that is that they'll have recieved more than a bare minimum of firearms training and be more suitable to the task. That's a BIG assumption.

MSgtEgress

December 14, 2012, 09:31 PM

Section 1 of the 14th amendment:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Tex, I will defer to a much smarter guy than I on the fallacy of "incorporation"

"The Bill Of Rights isn't incorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, as the Supreme Court has said most of it is, because "due process" refers to an adversarial hearing -- in most circumstances involving right to counsel, right to testify, right to compel witnesses, right to cross-examine witnesses, right to neutral finder of fact, etc. If it had been incorporated, someone -- anyone -- could have been expected to mention that fact when an amendment to include the separation of church and state principle in the Constitution was debated in the late 19th century; no one said, "We don't need this because we have the Incorporation Doctrine" because no one had that idea." -

Kevin R C Gutzman, JD, PhD
Professor of History
Western Connecticut State University

I would say that under the 14th amendment abortion should be illegal. (depriving one of life without due process)

Cactus Jack Arizona

December 14, 2012, 09:35 PM

Great letter OP. However, I might add that one armed officer/guard might not be enough. Principles and other admin/teachers need to be trained and packing. These stupid "gun free zones" are dangerous, but only for the innocent.

Unfortunately, most people have been led into the belief by anti-gun politicians and their helpful stooges in the msm, that they are much safer in these stupid zones. This idea couldn't be further from the truth.

Personally, I blame these very politicians and media for this and other incidences where people are being gunned down in these "gun free zones". Oh, let's not discount the anti-gun morons in hollywood as well for this hysteria. They've certainly played their parts in this destructive ideology.

ccsniper

December 14, 2012, 09:35 PM

There are plenty of people like me, that are willing to take those guard positions. I am more than willing to undergo the checks & training that the position would require. I am also willing to donate 1 day a week to do that job at no cost to the county. Israel has had to deal with this for a long time. I believe we can learn alot from them.

+1

I think it is sick how the media and the politicians have already jumped on gun owners as if we were the cause of these kinds of events. I can't stand how the media eats this stuff up because of the ratings they get off of it. I am writing my local reps now to get CC for teachers. I think it would be better for multiple people in the school to be armed than having only one armed guard/police officer. Plus I think having a police officer in every school would be to expensive on the part of the state and would enforce the police state ideology that is already being pressed into existence.

Captain*kirk

December 14, 2012, 09:38 PM

Let's bear in mind that most teachers (not all) are liberal-minded "creative-sorts" who abhor guns and believe any bloodthirsty killer can be rationalized out his his insanity by discussion, debate, or diatribe.
It ain't so.
Those types are either morally or mentally unable to execute a decision when it's shoot or be shot.
Sorry, but that's the rotten truth.

Texan Scott

December 14, 2012, 10:27 PM

That may depend on the culture wherein you find yourself... other parts of the world, a matronly 60yr old social studies teacher might pop a gunman twice in the face to protect "her" kids.
The point is, you never can be sure - and neither can the shooter, unless the State puts up signs PROMISING him that no law-abiding citizen has a gun.

Oddly enough, we do.

Captain*kirk

December 14, 2012, 10:50 PM

Point taken.

hboy35

December 14, 2012, 10:57 PM

I want to point out the possible inaccuracy of the statement that here in Texas administrators who are far away from protection are allowed to be armed. Please explain. When I got my Texas chl I was taught in no uncertain terms that you cannot carry inside a public school. Unless that law has changed, I don't see how they can be armed if the are administrators and not law enforcement officers. And last check, that law hasn't changed.

hso

December 14, 2012, 11:25 PM

The OP's example is a good one for people struggling to look for solutions to the problem of disturbed young men carrying out mass shootings, but Activism isn't a discussion forum and it isn't the place for discussion outside of the scope of protecting the 2A and RKBA.

Please offer prayers and sympathy to the victims and their families in General.